Is anyone using a MorningLinc yet? I just purchased one and have it
working locally. Meaning that tapping the set button toggles the
state of the lock. I have not yet been able to get MH to make
anything happen. Any luck tips or tricks?
Thanks,
-Dustin

On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 06:45:23PM -0700, Matthew Campbell wrote:
> Why don't we move to sccs? I'm familiar with it, or was in 1980. ;)
You didn't answer my question in my previous Email, nor do you seem to have
grasped the fact that the cost is in switching, unless you're just trolling
now.
Marc
--
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
Microsoft is to operating systems ....
.... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/

Why don't we move to sccs? I'm familiar with it, or was in 1980. ;)
Matt
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Marc MERLIN <marc_mh@...> wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 02:26:08AM +1200, Ryan Davies wrote:
>> Personally I would suggest we make a move to GIT. Its easier to maintain, Alot
>> more descriptive when coming to source changes, VERY easy to deploy and much
>> more up to date. Personally i feel that SVN is slowly dying, and only reason
>> its still around because some people wont move on :p (Only my opinion)
>
> That may be true, but with any migration, you have to look at the cost of
> changing vs the benefits.
> Let me be blunt: how much code have you submitted to mh svn where svn really
> has been a problem for you?
>
>> Not to mention branching a project in GIT while you work on stuff so your
>> changes dont go into trunk accidently is simple (If your on your branch) (git
>> checkout ryan or git checkout master etc)
>
> svn does branches fine, we use them right now.
>
>> SVN branching is very complex, and im always paranoid my changes are going to
>> taint the entire tree, and branching is too dainting to make me want to
>
> I don't think so, but the insteon branch has not created any problems and nothing
> can taint the main tree.
>
>> SVN also lets you submit changes without first running svn up, git you must
>> pull changes and merge (Or automerge if no conflicts arise) before you push to
>> the branch.
>
> Git does better there, but you can run git on top of svn to do that already
> if you like git.
>
>> So my question to you is, Do we keep SVN? Do we look at going to GIT? or both
>> (Sync the two repo types)?
>
> Personally I don't think mh is getting craploads of development to a point
> where svn has been an issue.
> svn is simple to use, takes 5mn to learn and basically you only need 4 or 5
> commands.
> No offense, but git has a bunch of commands, and you actually need to learn
> a fair amount more to be effective with git. I personally haven't missed git
> so much yet that it's been worth my time to learn.
>
> Marc
> --
> "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R.
> Microsoft is to operating systems ....
> .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking
> Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability
> What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know.
> Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools
> to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
> ________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to: http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=1365
>
>
--
Matthew Campbell
Storage Solution Consultant
Storage Platform Engineering Management
IT | Kaiser Permanente